A Bad Disparate Impact on Defense

Mr. Galston and others argue that a larger defense budget would shatter spending discipline. They say this with straight faces.

Regarding William Galston’s “An Indefensible Approach to Defense” (Politics & Ideas, March 25): The “sequester” is holy writ for liberals and leftists because it cuts defense. A weak America is a strong America, or some such formulation. The military is suffering and with that suffering comes an inability to protect the country. The federal government is ignoring a prime reason for its existence—to provide for the common defense.

Mr. Galston and others argue that a larger defense budget would shatter spending discipline. They say this with straight faces though the deficit continues to climb. They claim that the cuts are fair, as every department is suffering under proportional cuts. The military is cutting people. It is shrinking. It no longer can fight a two-front war. It is on the way to a pre-1940 size.

What other department is cutting staff? How many people have been laid off at the Department of Education or the Environmental Protection Agency or OSHA or the Department of Health and Human Services? How many people are working in the federal government, excluding the military, today compared with 10 years ago? Nobody else is complaining about budget cuts because nobody is suffering from them.